The category Psychus aims at tickling not your funny bone but your medulla oblongata. So, as long as your grey matters and, of course, functions, Psychus is going to be your mind-gym for Revels’16. Don’t miss leg-day, though.

Lie to Me
Ashish Sharma and Vanika Rakshit

The first round of Lie to Me, brought to you by Psychus, tested how good a person is at one-on-one communication. The participants observed interrogation tapes of a crime and had to determine who was guilty of the two suspects. “It’s all about how well you the read body language, you know? Voice modulation, being fidgety, all of that”, says Laasya, the event head of Lie to Me. Their enthusiasm for the event was awarded by a room full of eager participants. Niket, a second year student of MIT, says “I’m really good at bluff, so of course, I’m participating in this.”
The afternoon of day 2 saw the commencement of Round 2 of the event. The format of this round was inspired by the Box of Lies game from Jimmy Fallon’s The Tonight Show. The twenty competing participants were grouped in pairs. The participants in each group had to compete against each other in a point based game, based essentially on the art of lying. Each participant got a picture which they had to describe to their opponent as honestly or dishonestly as they chose to. Their opponent’s job was to tell whether the description was an honest one based purely on an analysis of body language.
A written test with three ‘Would you rather’ questions, greeted the participants who had qualified for round three of the event. The questions dealt with hypothetical scenarios. The test would determine the participants’ mindset which would be the focus of the next segment of the contest. In the next segment, each participant was randomly allotted one of the questions they answered along with a chit that either read ‘True’ or ‘False’. If the chit read ‘False’ the participant had to convince the audience that they chose the option contrary to the one they actually chose and if it read ‘True’, all they had to do was to speak in favor of their choice. To succeed in this contest of treachery each participant had to deceive the audience into incorrectly calling their bluff to earn points.

Cognitive Control
Meghana Dharmapuri and Neela Sharma

Cognitive Control, an extremely gripping event, was conducted by the category Psychus. It was a three round event conducted over the first, third and fourth day of Revels. This event put to test the common sense and intellect of the participants through extensively thought out and painstakingly compiled written tests.

The first round was a general elimination round. It consisted of a general EQ-IQ test to judge the basic quick thinking in any, however weird situation one may ever come across. For example, one of the questions asked was, “If you had to write a love letter to an electronic gadget, which one would it be?” Several other wittily framed random questions were asked which required out of the box thinking.

The next round had 20 participants. It was centered on the idea as to how sharp a person’s memory can be.  This round was further divided into 3 sub-rounds. In the first round, fifteen objects were projected on a screen in a certain order for some time and then participants were given about a minutww to list out all the objects with brownie points for the correct order. Instead of fifteen, thirty objects were shown in the next round. The final round, images were displayed with each being associated with a 3 digit number. Rest of the rules remained intact. About 6-7 teams with the highest points qualified.

The third round truly put to test the participants cognitive abilities with a seemingly simple exercise. It was a play on numbers- how certain patterns of numbers were given to them and they had to associate them to the black and white flash cards that were being put up by the organizers. A total of eight participants qualified for this round of which seven turned up for the event.

Cognitive Control was an absolutely thrilling, mind boggling and fast moving event which had everyone put their thinking caps on.

Conquest
Sanat Mharolkar

Psychus presented Conquest, a Game of Thrones themed strategy based event. Before you jump to any conclusions let us tell you, it’s not what you think it is. After a preliminary selection round, the qualifying contestants had been randomly put into teams. No, they had been sworn into different houses. They were all destined to play the game of thrones, and in NLH 203, things were about to get dirty. Er, we mean bloodthirsty, GoT style.

The instructions for the game were far too complex and confusing. A very detailed map and nice little tokens to place on the map, it was obvious that the organizers had put a lot of effort into making this event a success. The complexity of the rules gave the game a sluggish start. However, whatever the event lacked in coordination, the participants and organizers made up for it with their enthusiasm.

There were armies, allies and capital cities, and the game had begun to heat up as the teams got used to the moves. The event had a lot of light moments as well, with the organizers being unable to decipher what the teams had written on the papers they sent in. Between rounds, the teams were allowed to communicate – they could forge alliances with other teams and were also warned about allies backstabbing each other. Sure enough, soon after the first round of communication, the house of Stark lost territory to some treachery. They had nothing to give back in return but cold stares. And just like that, the game was alive. Within a few minutes, time ran out, and amid confusion that had become typical of the event, the game ended in a close finish.

The final round of Conquest took a more serious turn. The winning team from the previous round had been selected, and the team members were made to compete in the last round individually. While the first round tested various EQ and IQ components of psychology and the second round tested strategy and the ability to work in a team, the final round was the final test for a king – it was a test of morality and ethics. The contestants were given a scenario that presented them with an ethical dilemma and they had to respond to the situation. As Damayanti Sengupta, the event head, put it, “It’s easy to criticize leaders, but through Conquest we wanted to test and put ourselves in their shoes.” The event did just that. In the end Conquest was a game of thrones, and there could be only one king.